If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post and use all the features of the Chess2U forums. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

I bring here chess position from Ahmed Kamal topic as the beginning verification old tests by more actually chess engines. I will be tested only by legally engines which I have!Old tests like BT2630 , BS2830 and other have a little wrong solutions. These sets, known for '90 should be actually well verified, unless for correct answer we must wait another decades ??!!

Position of test BS2830 no.5, is described as below with today's analysis by my only legal version, historical Houdini 1.5 :

How you see, Houdini 1.5 (sic!) calculated as the best 1.Re1 with 2,5 points advantage above taken solution 1.e5. I suppose StockfishDD and better versions Houdini and any other best chessengines confirm it !!!

Last edited by Kajordzak on Sun Feb 09, 2014 6:05 pm; edited 5 times in total

@Kajordzak wrote:Encouraged by VT, I tested next chess position, now from BT2630. At the beginning I will be jump "from flower to flower" by testing the most controversial test items and will make summary at the end.

How you see, Houdini 1.5 (sic!) calculated as the best 1.Re1 with 2,5 points advantage above taken solution 1.e5. I suppose StockfishDD and better versions Houdini and any other best chessengines confirm it !!!

I see that topic is not interesting so I describe it generally, without details! I tested chess positions BT2630 test by Stockfish 4 - I know obviously not newest, but enough strong - Q6600, conditions like earlier... Every position was tested by 1 hour +- 20 min. (depend on depth calculating)

Stockfish 4 showed that BT2630 contains several items with quite other solutions, several items with other equal and close solutions. Often the solution, at Q6600 and old hardware appeared for the moment with the wrong motive solution. These circumstances, in my opinion showed incorrect selection by authors of some test items, and all BT2630 is wrong!!I have still PC386 and checked ranking changes of Genius 2.016 (Win3.11), including errors taking solutions. Ranking increased about 100-150 points!

Further for more interested people (VT suppose!) I will take a little history about Bednorz-Tönissen test BT2630. It is the successor BT2450 test, described too in archival article in quarterly Niggemann company ( www.niggemann.com ) 20 years ago (!), 94/03 "preise & info":

In the '90s main ranking chessprograms was SSDF, were other rankings too like rebel ( http://www.rebel.nl/ http://www.top-5000.nl/testsets.htm http://www.rebel.nl/rebelfaq/rc3faq03.htm ) and Eric Halsworth http://www.elhchess.demon.co.uk/ehss.htm https://chessprogramming.wikispaces.com/Eric+Hallsworth too. The BT2630 results were given for auxiliary rating:

There is no big surprise, but StockfishDD again is much slower than Houdini1.5. Now I will not check other items of test, maybe there are more surprises...This position and others like from http://www.chess2u.com/t7485p285-stockfish-tests#52421 shows that Stckfish will not find best move in short games, Houdini and others engines can find !!!